Dr Zik was robbed by the British at Independence of the power that he had fought for. If it seemed that in the election of 1959 it was his fellow nationalist Awolowo who was targeted by the British - as he was - it was only because Zik had been set up and neutralised three years earlier. Zik was nobbled by the Bank Enquiry of 1956, which simply sprang a trap elaborately prepared by British intelligence. In 1962, having clipped Awo's wings in the 1959 election, the same trick was pulled on Awo by the Coker Commission, as had been used on Zik six years before. The Senior Resident in the West, as he told me in 1960, had for years had a safe full of evidence against Awo. The timing was crucial. Nipping an offence in the bud can lead to a minor breach being corrected. Left to develop into a major misdemeanour and strategically timed, the same offence can be devastating.
Zik had a reputation for devious behaviour, which was well deserved, but he had learned from masters of deceit. The British used every possible stratagem to defeat Zik and there was no intelligence technique that was not employed against him. His 'phone was tapped; his mail opened, or even destroyed, routinely. Plots and dirty tricks were used; conspiracies and sabotage encouraged. That Zik survived this barrage of assaults by a determined enemy is a tribute to the skill of the old fox. Sadly, he did not survive unscathed. By 1956 Zik was caged. Suddenly he is a damp squib on the political scene. His trips to Northern leaders were not those of a major politician seeking alliances but a defeated burnt-out leader begging for scraps.
Zik was a realist. The Bank Enquiry had not only bankrupted him personally, but left his great NCNC, the vessel which would guarantee him power, drifting on to the rocks. The British had struck at his weak point, the money needed for political action. Suddenly to allow political action in a hastily constructed democracy, a house that Jack built, without provision for financing political parties, was irresponsible but calculated. Nigeria was a vast empire of small nations but its politicians were relatively poor people. The graft they employed to pay for political action was a necessary stratagem, hopefully justified in the struggle for freedom from the colonial yoke. What is lawful and decorous in a settled and mature democracy may not be fitting on the battlefield of a struggle to remove a great imperial power from its unlawfully won conquests.
The British built in the legal loopholes in the Regional Marketing Boards and stood back as both Awo and Zik used them to finance political action. The problem was one of perception and trust. For all their tirades against the British, both Zik and Awo were seduced by the English ploys of fair play, decent behaviour, cricket and the rule of law. Educated in the West, they succumbed to the temptation to see themselves as candidates for acceptance by the English establishment. Zik went further along this path after 1956 simply because he knew he had been beaten. He would rest up and bide his time. Meanwhile he would be President and wear a Field Marshal's uniform and try to get a string of medals. Forced to the sidelines, he would have a ringside seat at the humiliation of his implacable opponent, Awo, by the vengeful Northerners.
It would soon become evident to Zik that the NCNC might be next for the chop. With Akintola ruling the West in the NPC interest and a Mid West State ruled by the NPC, it was becoming evident that the East was no longer indispensable as the NPC's ally. The Northerners had never wanted Zik as President and had always loathed him, standing as he did for everything in the South that the North hated. Zik too was extremely frustrated. Since 1956 he had been a figurehead. The British-backed Okotie Eboh, with seemingly unlimited financial resources, now controlled the NCNC. Okotie Eboh had little or nothing in common with Zik, NCNC nationalism or the East. He was from the Mid West and was to all intents and purposes a close ally of the NPC. Okotie Eboh's power came from his unlimited funds. These came from British and other firms by courtesy of the British administration. My colleague Charles Bunker had established this conduit at the instigation of the Governor General in 1956.
The hypocrisy of the British is truly breathtaking. At the very time in 1956 when Zik was being exposed as dishonest, the British were pressurising commercial interests for contributions to Okotie Eboh, which would enable him to replace Zik as the power broker in the NCNC! Having defeated Awo and the Action Group as well as Zik in the North in 1959 by astonishing, blatant chicanery, the British exposed Awo in 1962 for his high-handed use of public funds. The treason of the British in all this chicanery, gerrymandering and election rigging was routine, but perfectly in order because it was deemed necessary to establish stability and unity in Nigeria. Now charges of treason were needed to reinforce the accusations of dishonesty against Awolowo. Unlike the substantial, real treason of the British, Awolowo's alleged treason was pathetic and laughable.
Nevertheless the British were merciful. They were happy to see Awo go to jail for only ten years. They could, after all, have had him executed. However, there was nothing really personal in all this. In British eyes, when it is a criminal's time to cop it, he should go quietly. Framing of likely guilty suspects is an old tradition with the British. Once Awo had been sent down it would be someone else's turn and there would be no hard feelings. In 1966 it became suddenly essential for Awo to be rehabilitated quickly and very neatly used to help persecute Zik, who had been last year's favoured British flavour. There is a practised symmetry here, distilled from centuries of uninhibited wrongdoing. The British have to be flexible and enterprising and sometimes ruthless with rascals and rogues and rebels, as they were with Ben Franklin when they opened his letters. Imagine the rage and disgust they felt when they found that Franklin had purloined letters and was spying on them? No one but an American rotter would stoop to such conduct! British hypocrisy is such a delight unless one happens to be on the receiving end!
There is no evidence that Zik had Balewa and Akintola and Okotie Eboh killed. He was, I think, out of town at the time. Who knows whether the sad news affected his recovery.
Zik had been sorely tried for ten years by the machinations of the British and the Northerners. It is ironic that, had he died, the young Majors' coup would not have been perceived, as it was, as an Igbo plot. Did it matter who put the young Majors up to their bloody deed? If everyone who wanted Okotie Eboh dead had been a suspect, the whole nation would have been on trial. The young Majors were seen initially as public benefactors. Sadly, because Zik was out of town, up to two million of his people were to die.
Had the British not cheated Zik and Awo of their rightful inheritance of power and the leadership of an independent Nigeria, it might have all turned out quite differently. It was the British who created Nigeria. Was it the British who aborted the new nation in a fit of pique on receiving their marching orders?
19 February 1992
Return to Essays
Return to Home Page
The Plot to Kill Zik
The British adored their stooge, Balewa. After all, he was British made. They heartily disliked Awolowo because he was clever, sensible and moral. Here was a true leader of his people to fear. It was Awo who could have united Nigeria as a sober, balanced and realistic leader. Awo had to be stopped for fear he would upset the Northern bandwagon. Ironically, Awo was safely in jail when the young Majors staged their military coup, which removed Britain's boys from the political scene. How the British must have wished, as they contemplated the destruction of their highly successful master plan for post-Independence Nigeria, that they had activated the contingency plot to poison Dr Azikiwe. For if Awo was feared for his cleverness, and Zik ridiculed for his vanity and mercurial nature, it was Zik who had poured forth his hatred of the colonial regime for a decade through the pages of his West African Pilot, which was Britain's bete noire.
My own appreciation of Zik's character - and he was certainly devious - came from my friend, Francis Nwokedi, who was one of Zik's highly placed lieutenants in the administration. Francis was one of our boys, and needed to display total loyalty to the British if he were to prosper. His opportunity came during the Enugu shootings where he displayed great skill in defusing what had the potential to be a highly embarrassing situation for the British. Francis was commended for his role, and established as one Ibo who could be trusted. He was rightly judged to be a capable, clever careerist, who was cynical about nationalist politics. He was cleverer than George Foggon, the Labour Commissioner, but shared his obsessive ambitions, and understood and got on well with him. For the British, Nwokedi was a type we understood well, as he fitted the stereotype of the Scot on the make, which fitted a number of the proconsuls we sent out to Nigeria. Nwokedi had no interest in Communism and was indifferent to abstract political ideas. As a cunning manipulator himself, he understood all too well how Zik had to be tricky and quick on his feet to survive so much British hostility. As I have recounted elsewhere, Francis explained to me how Zik would always be one step ahead of the British and most certainly never found at the scene of a crime.
Every Ibo civil servant was an unpaid member of Zik's own Intelligence Service. However, although the ubiquitous, loyal Ibo civil servant was well informed, the secret file system and exclusion of even top African civil servants from sensitive positions was intended to protect our political plans for Zik's future. Even so, it was not difficult to divine British attitudes to Zik and to guess that contingency plans did exist to 'silence' or neutralise him. For his part, Zik made it clear that he feared assassination by the British. The colonial regime pooh-poohed this as evidence of Zik's paranoia and his desire to project himself as a persecuted, fearless nationalist. Zik was open to ridicule by the British because he was conceited and vain and took strenuous efforts to avoid going to jail. On this score he had little to fear, for the British too wanted to avoid turning Zik into a martyr. We needed to neutralise him quietly. Assassination would have been counterproductive, unless carried out in such a way that no blame could be attached to the British.
Poisons were the order of the day for British covert operations, and 'Porton Down specials' for all occasions did exist, as Eden was aware when he ordered Egypt's Nasser to be poisoned following on the seizure of the Suez Canal. The Americans too, with whom we shared our knowledge of poisons and chemical and biological weapons, plotted a similar fate for Cuba's Castro. Contingency plans to disable, eliminate or otherwise silence Zik most certainly did exist and what seemed to be Zik's paranoid fears and hypochondria were quite well founded. Even after Independence Zik's fear continued, and he travelled everywhere with a contingent of medical staff. By that time Zik had been effectively neutralised and apparently outwitted by British machinations. Zik had been shunted into the political wilderness with the prestigious but powerless post of Governor General and then, when Nigeria became a Republic, President.
The events of 1966, however, proved to the British that, if Zik had been neutralised, his power to use others to subvert the British master plan for Nigeria was still a reality. If there is a shred of evidence to link Zik with the awesome military coup of 1966, it has never materialised. Zik was in England receiving medical treatment at the time. However, there was widespread suspicion of a Zikist plot, which was to surface and lead to the bloody Biafran Civil War. I have explained elsewhere that, if Zik had been assassinated by the young Majors, two million young people's lives might have been saved in that totally unnecessary conflict.
This was the background to the sensational disclosure during the early euphoric years of Independence that a plot to kill Dr Azikiwe at Apapa (the port at Lagos) had been foiled by the prompt action of the Intelligence Services. It was extremely embarrassing to the British because a senior British official was allegedly involved. The truth was richly comic. There was indeed a 'plot' at Apapa, but it was a plot of land, a highly sought after plot, developed by the Federal Public Works and Lagos Executive Development Board. The Board re-housed Lagosians from the squalor of Lagos Island, and a senior Nigerian politician wanted a plot for a relative. This was quite improper and was resisted as far as possible by the totally honest and incorruptible British official, but political reality removed any choice he had in the matter. He arranged to meet the politician outside the House of Representatives to discuss allocating the required plot.
The British had established a Police Special Branch during the colonial period and plain clothes meant that police were disguised as market women, clerks, or whatever. On this particular sweltering day outside the House of Representatives, the Police were well represented amongst the beggars and traders who hassled passing civil servants and politicians. It was the sharp ears of a beggar in rags who eavesdropped on a conversation between a senior politician and a British official. The Plot at Apapa was the subject of discussion. The British official found the matter distasteful and was nervous. If he spoke in a roundabout way, it was because he was not accustomed to backhander deals which were becoming the order of the day in other Government Departments. Arrangements for the 'plot' at Apapa were in hand. Everything would go according to plan. The 'plot' was ready.
At Police Headquarters the news of a Plot at Apapa could only mean one thing to an Igbo police officer. The beloved Dr Zik was due to visit Apapa with his usual cavalcade of cars and supporters. The British had been rumbled. Zik was to be assassinated by the British at Apapa. This was a total nonsense. The totally innocent British official was interrogated and his story of a plot of land ridiculed as a specious cover story. In due course he was to be sworn to secrecy and deported, despite his protestations. It was the cock-up theory in action. Proof of how easy it could be to manufacture conspiracy theories out of innocent happenings. Which does not, however, explain the total panic in the offices of the British High Commission and in Whitehall. It was true that a totally false story of a planned British assassination plot could still be politically embarrassing to Whitehall. What produced the panic amongst the British was the knowledge that there did exist contingency plans to assassinate Zik. The black farce, which had developed outside the House of Representatives, could have ended up as a major political crisis for the British in this capital of Black Africa.
The British were successful in suppressing news of the Plot at Apapa. Steps had to be taken to ensure that the thoroughly frightened British official never revealed details of what he thought was a total farce. Colonel Henderson was, I think, the Director of the LEDB whose career was cut short like mine. Our colleague, Arthur Skinner, the Director of Federal Public Works, tried to thwart his Minister's plans to award the Niger Bridge contract to someone who offered him a heavy percentage, and Arthur too, after a struggle, gave up. Neither of my colleagues knew anything of Porton Down specials or poisons but, strangely, Arthur like myself developed a rare tropical disease. He was to be diagnosed eventually as having tropical sprue, a disease rarely seen in Africa, but more common in the Far East. His disease would later be known as coeliac sprue and he would develop an associated condition, dermatitis herpetiformis.
How strange! When I stumbled on secret British machinations to destabilise Dr Azikiwe in the late 1950's and remove him from effective power, I was silenced too. I was warned by a Secret Service official to flee before they killed me. My health collapsed and I developed a tropical disease rarely seen in Africa - tropical sprue, coeliac disease and dermatitis herpetiformis.
16 April 1993
Return to Essays
Return to Home Page
Zig, Zag, Zik
Of course Zik must have inspired the military coup of January 1966. Had he not been side-tracked into the ceremonial position of President? This was Zik, the great nationalist leader rendered powerless. This was tolerable when the NCNC was in an alliance with the NPC, which persecuted Awolowo's opposition Action Group. However, having broken Awo and put him in jail for ten years on trumped-up charges, the NCNC itself was now being targeted. Surely the millions of young Ibos in the Army, professions and the Civil Service, who loved Zik, must have let their love boil over into unconstitutional violence? This is an attractive theory and might seem logical and reasonable in explaining total unreason, but it is only a theory. There is little evidence of Igbo responsibility and none of Dr Zik's. Each assertion of Ibo involvement can be countered by a counter-argument. For example, the young Majors were largely Ibo? Yes, but the many more NCOs and ordinary soldiers were Northerners.
I have made some notes which seem to indicate Zikist involvement. I must in fairness take a contrary line to see if the weight of the evidence points elsewhere.
Whoever killed the Northern leaders and their allies, should not the abominable behaviour of those politicians show clearly that the Southerners generally had been provoked beyond endurance? In that respect the responsibility for what happened must belong to the Northern junta. Even if logic would implicate the Southerners, this excludes another pragmatic rationale, often found to be involved in explosive situations, and that is the cock-up theory. Illegality by the North did provoke a violent and illegal reaction from the young majors, but millions who might have dreamt of revenge were apathetic, as probably Zik was, even if tempted. It is even more probable that his respect for the rule of law totally excluded even thoughts of a bloody reaction.
A Zikist conspiracy theory might go beyond inspiring or backing the young Majors and extend to replacing them with General Ironsi, but reason knocks this on the head. There was no certainty that the Northerners would not respond promptly to the coup and place a Northerner in charge of the headless State. As it happened, when Ironsi did take charge, he abolished Zik's post as President. The latter point is made in a curious study of the coup by D.J.M. Muffett, a Northern sympathiser, who was a close friend of Sir A. Bello. (Let Truth be Told. 1982. Zaria). Not unreasonably as a passionate Northern sympathiser, Muffett is extremely suspicious regarding Zikist involvement, but what is most conspicuous by its absence is any recognition that the British were deeply involved, not only in Northern politics, but through the total power of the North with every aspect of Southern and Federal politics.
Let us try to get closer to the killings, which showed that all claims made by the British for Nigerian democracy, sovereignty and independence were but myths. Why 15 January? Muffett's friends, Bello and Balewa, destroyed any prospect of Nigerian democracy when they took power by criminal false pretences following the rigging of the independence elections by the British. One foul deed leads inevitably to another and another. There was not only guilty knowledge, but also the small problem of the next election. There was also the fear of being found out. This is why the Western Region leaders had to be destroyed. Bello and Balewa, firmly controlled and directed by the British, had been acting criminally at least since 1956, and the West was still not at peace under the thumb of the pro-British North. A final solution was called for. The military would take charge and the date of 'Operation No Mercy' was set for 17 January. And the Army rebelled against their political masters. It was not unruly Westerners who were killed, but violent, criminal pro-British Bello and Balewa. Operation Damissa was not quite the operation Bello and Balewa intended, nor did they expect to be operated on with such surgical precision. It seems that they got some of their own medicine at the hands of the very young men they had depended on to eliminate their enemies once and for all.
Zik was in London. Even if totally innocent, perhaps he had with his remarkable political intuition guessed something was beginning to smell. It was true that he had been a party to the destruction of the West that took precedence over the preservation of Nigerian democracy, or even Nigeria itself. Zik's hands were not clean. He was now rebelling against his erstwhile allies, the NPC, because, having cut Awo down, they could bring Zik to book and settle more old scores. Zik's supporters had seen Zik's game and, while his life was to be spared, they saw no reason to let him continue to pretend that he was the all-powerful President. And let us note that the Igbo Majors were going to the rescue of the West. True they were next for the chop, but even so, what they did led to the release of Awo and his colleagues from prison.
Muffett says that Balewa dreamed of a coalition with himself in charge, in other words a recognition of the fact that there never had been any serious attempt to establish democracy in Nigeria. The British had always intended Nigeria to be ruled by a benevolent dictatorship. It was not only Balewa who was a lackey as was often said, but Bello too. It was all becoming a bit obvious and sick-making. Operation No Mercy was the last straw.
Given the scenario of 15 January and hindsight of a civil war that cost up to one million lives, I regret that Zik and the Eastern Region Prime Minister were not assassinated. Had they been killed, a million other lives might not have been lost, for the plot was perceived as an Igbo conspiracy. The deaths of two Ibo politicians would have silenced this accusation which had such deadly consequences.
Zik's behaviour was erratic and that was a fact, but the role of the British is not brought out in Muffett's account. If it were, Zik's peripatetic approach to politics might make more sense. Anyway, the zigzag approach worked for Zik. He survived while Nigeria died. Had British treachery been absent, Nigerian democracy might have been properly delivered, practised and perhaps even taken root. Zik the shadow happily had a long life; unhappily he was destroyed as a great political figure by British blackmail in 1956, when the British placed their best boy Okotie Eboh in position, supplanting Zik as leader of the parliamentary NCNC. In 1966 Zik zigzagged once too often. For the sake of Nigeria, it might have been preferable for him to die with Balewa, Bello and Akintola.
4 April 1992
Posts: 75 | From: Cambridge, MA | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged
posted
Nobiora: What do you really want to achieve from starting up this thread?
___________________ "We are where we are in large part at the moment, because our self-identified leaders of thought have put us there."----Ukpabi Asika Posts: 321 | From: Athens, Ohio USA | Registered: Mar 2001
| IP: Logged
posted
After all is said and done, the bottom line is this: Zik was no Igbo nationalist. He turned his back on the liberation of Ndigbo and worked as British/US stooge to the detriment of Ndigbo. A great wonder why Zik could not attempt a little bit of the feat of nationalism that Nkrumah (bless his soul) wrought for Ghanaians. Nkrumah's legacy lives even till today. Fact is, Igbos have never had a single nationalist. None.
BTW, can any body give us the genealogy of Zik. It seem to be lacking. All we have been told so far is that Zik's father (whom nobody seem to know) had him in northern Nigeria way back when. In Biafraland forum, someone even gave a cook and whacky tale of how Zik was begotten from the Gods...as nobody could pinpoint his ancestry. Ha! Such a revered leader, ahem, hero...and nobody could trace his lineage...considering that Igbos take delight in checking family history among themselves. Ndigbo, you are in hot soup!
Ndigbo, before you start running away again with hero-worshipping, please delve into the background of your so called heros. They all have (coincidental) one thing in common...they are anti-Igbo nationalism. They all love being in bed with Awusa/Fulani and Yoruba, including Britain, and all the above has no interest in the development and upliftment of Igboland and Igbo masses. Self-aggrandizement is their mantra. Now, why is that? Therein lies the answer of what ails Ndigbo.
posted
Ugali [BTW, are you aware that your name means cornmeal porridge in East Africa?]
The point of starting this thread is to make public an account by a disgruntled former British colonial official about how Britain manipulated the 1956 census and the 1959 elections and how these actions led to the civil war. I am interested in your views as to the veracity of his allegations and how they fit in with what we know about the history of Nigeria.
We have never known to what extent the imperial powers contributed to the imbroglio in which we find ourselves today. We have long suspected and constantly accused Britain of manipulating us. Finally, one of their own men who has a grudge against his former masters has come forward with his own version of the events.
Posts: 75 | From: Cambridge, MA | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged
How body? Hope you're keeping well. You will soon understand that re-claiming or re-focusing a thread is a very awkward business except you don't get any input from Ughali times three(apologies Anu Nti).
Thanks for bringing up this thread. This guy's account is by far the most liberating and truthful account of what happened behind the scenes in BiafraNigeria. The official correspondence between Lagos and London for the sixties was declassified in Y2K and the bits I have read corroborate his account to the letter.
I shall be writing him shortly and I hope he finds a bit of peace after his useful confessions. It must have been extremely difficult for our men who battled against all these external machinations and forces.
___________________ Awo's political idea was based on the assumption that any town beyond Owo was Igbo or Hausa. Awo was not socialised; he was not a good mixer because he did not have the opportunity, which the secondary school offered. ~TOS Benson, Baba Oba of Lagos
Mr. Wilson's revelations are remarkable only for the rare candor with which he tells the story. Such candor is rare from Brits of that era, and it is that much more interesting in that he did it over the protestations of the Empire. But, strictly speaking, the term "revelations" is a misnomer in this case because what Mr. Wilson is telling us is an open secret, or it is nothing that any student of history could not have determined from the abundance of circumstantial data pointing to such a plot.
History tells us that Zik and Awo were two of the most competent and effective members of the class that fought for BiafraNigeria's independence. Unlike some of their contemporaries and erstwhile members of BiafraNigeria's political class, Awo and Zik had enough education and experience in the ways of the white man to match wits with the best that Britain of the 1950s had to offer. If Britain was to muster a credible neo-colonialist order, Awo and Zik had to be neutralized. They were, at least until the Biafran war, which Awo used to resume the initiative. The mediocrity of Tafawa Belewa was best suited to the British agenda, and, if mediocrity needed a competent reactionary force, Ahmadu Bello was there to provide it.
Nothing highlights the success of Britain's diabolical designs on Zik better than the spectacle of Zik, the foremost leader of the independence movement, being gracelessly sidelined into the ceremonial presidency of BiafraNigeria via the neo-colonialist title of "Governor General." At independence in 1979, a more resolute Joshua Nkomo rejected the ceremonial presidency of Zimbabwe.
In the 1950s and 1960s, Awo and Zik became the targets of Britain's campaign of perdition because the political success of both men in BiafraNigeria would have posed a severe threat to Britain's incipient neo-colonialist order. We are told that
quote:Zik was nobbled by the Bank Enquiry of 1956, which simply sprang a trap elaborately prepared by British intelligence. In 1962, having clipped Awo's wings in the 1959 election, the same trick was pulled on Awo by the Coker Commission, as had been used on Zik six years before.
But, what lessons did Nd'Igbo learn from the political calamity of Nnamdi Azikiwe? In the year 2000, another Igbo was president of BiafraNigeria's Senate. Would it be entirely out of place to say that
quote:Okadigbo was nobbled by the Kuta probe of 2000, which simply sprang a trap elaborately prepared by ….
The only difference is that today, Nigerian colonialism has replaced British colonialism, and all the peril that Zik purported to have fought to stop the British from doing to the Igbo is being done to the Igbo by the Yoruba and the Awusa.
Let it not be said that I forgave Zik/Ekwueme or Okadigbo for their anti-Igbo perfidy.
I am alive and kicking - was a little dispirited for a while after the Biafra House/MASSOB business in December but the struggle continues. Is the declassified British material you saw available on the web?
Posts: 75 | From: Cambridge, MA | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged
Indeed, the key question is whether Igbos [and other Nigerians] have learnt from Zik's travails in the hands of the Brits. As you note, going by the Okadigbo precedent, not very much. Worse still, we have the Emeka Offors in Anambra and the Ojo Maduekwes in Abia.
While not trying to exonerate Zik, I must say the folks who entrapped him were most astute spies and well versed in the foibles of human nature. I am not sure that if that same trap was set for quite a number of the loudest advocates of Biafra today, that they might not fall into it. Witness the Biafra House imbroglio.
But the funniest bit for me was Smith's claims that the British who put on these airs of being straitlaced, no-sex-please types were busy procuring little girls and boys for Balewa and other characters whom they subsequently blackmailed. They even used Nigerian girls and boys to sexually entrap their own oyibo people whom they felt might not go along with the project!
Posts: 75 | From: Cambridge, MA | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged
I must confess that I have missed you this last few weeks that I have been away from the board.The object of my starting the thread was simply to make public a historical account that could help explain the origins of Zik's political behaviour after the Foster-Sutton commission of inquiry of 1956.
I don't think even Zik himself ever seriously claimed to be an Igbo leader; he kind of saw himself a grand pan-African statesman whose peers were Nkrumah, Senghor, Nyerere etc.Its been very many years since I read Zik's "My Odyssey"; is there no reference to his paternity there?
Posts: 75 | From: Cambridge, MA | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged
To the best of my knowledge the British Government Public Records archive on BiafraNigeria is still presently in hard copies only. You know how conservative the Brits are, they're are quite proud for researchers to touch the original letters complete with felt-tip signature of the authors.
___________________ Awo's political idea was based on the assumption that any town beyond Owo was Igbo or Hausa. Awo was not socialised; he was not a good mixer because he did not have the opportunity, which the secondary school offered. ~TOS Benson, Baba Oba of Lagos
I have been away on holiday and will be re-joining the debates on this board in earnest very soon.
However, just a few words concerning this thread: Zik and co. did the best they could do. The Brits were a world power and used that power to great disadvantage to Africans, The current plight of Igbos and as an African nation examplify a very dark side to British colonial and post-colonial activities.
We must remain focused, opportunities lost are lost. Remember, for all intents and purposes, Nigeria is really D-E-A-D. And Greater opportunities may be missed should we remain stuck in the past.
Nevertheless, Nobiorah's posting above gives "great" insight into the mechinary of colonial politics. We must study it, learn from it and keep moving!
" I must say the folks who entrapped him were most astute spies and well versed in the foibles of human nature. I am not sure that if that same trap was set for quite a number of the loudest advocates of Biafra today, that they might not fall into it. Witness the Biafra House imbroglio." --- Obiora
" Zik and co. did the best they could do. The Brits were a world power and used that power to great disadvantage to Africans," --- AfricaWest
Ndubuisi and AfricaWest:
Obviously, Zik did more for BiafraNigeria's independence than most of his BiafraNigerian contemporaries. For that, he deserves credit. If Zik's worshippers restricted their adulation to that aspect of Zik's work for which the only intended and actual beneficiary was Nigeria (often to the detriment of Nd'Igbo and Biafrans), I would have no quarrel with them. Unfortunately for Zik and his delusions of Pax Africana and Pax Nigeriana his more astute opponents, especially Awolowo and Ahmadu Bello, made sure that Zik's story must be broken into four cogent parts, namely, 1) Zik de la Africa, 2) Zik de la BiafraNigeria, 3) Zik de la Biafra, and 4) Zik de la Nd'Igbo. In spite of the superhuman character that Zikist tales assumed even in his lifetime, whatever successes posted by Zik de la BiafraNigeria are overwhelmed by the colossal failures of the other Zik's, especially the third and fourth.
Zik, Nkruma, and Thurgood Marshal all attended Lincoln University in Pennsylvania. The Osagiefo went on to become the philosophical cum intellectual grandfather of Pan Africanism, and Thurgood Marshal, well, see Brown v. Board of Education, etc. As a Pan Africanist, Zik only managed to emerge as another student of the Osagiefo - a bad student at that. Lumumba and Nyerere were better adherents, if also mere students. Lumumba died too soon, and the Nwalimu delivered his lecture before he died. He even taught Zik a lesson about Biafra.
The same trap that ensnared Zik and reduced him to a hollow figure at BiafraNigeria's independence were as assuredly set by the British and their spies for Ghandi (the Mohandus), Mandela, Nkruma, Lumumba, Nyerere, and Kenyata.
Somewhere between civil disobedience and the Mau Mau execution of the European invaders, each of those men managed to muster a response to the white man for which each man was prepared to pay the ultimate price. Not our Zik! As long as the independence movement consisted of tea parties in London, Zik was in. There was nothing for which Zik would lay down his life, not even the Biafran war against genocide.
An astute enemy such as Britain only cedes power to the opponent upon an accurate calculation that holding on to power would bring ruin. It would have been perilous for the British and their spies to deprive Kenyatta and his followers of the prize at independence. There was no peril to the British in neglecting Zik and giving power to a man who did not fight for it.
As for the "Biafra House imbroglio," which, by the way, is not the last word on Biafra, I can assure you that it was not the work of the MI6, or the CIA, or even OBJ. It was the work of the I-G-B-O. Anything else is ibika!
What I have been able to get from reading the defenders of Zik is that Zik failed because the British placed obstacles before him. We have been referred to the work of Harold Smith, which paints two pictures of Zik: one as a victim of British machinations, and the other as a coward afraid to go to jail in the struggle for independence.
We are then persuaded to be selective in accepting the disclosures about Zik contained in Mr. Smith’s biography. We are to accept that Zik was a victim of the British. But, we are to pretend that his failure resulting from that victim-hood was actually success.
Pardon me, but my heroes are not made of such a man as described by Mr. Smith. The Zik described by Mr. Smith is a victim, not a hero. Some of the praise-singers rely a little less heavily on the Smith bio, but they fail to either indicate that Zik was their contemporary, and they are therefore making a firsthand report about Zik. Nor do they cite the sources upon which they rely for much of what they pass off as facts about Zik.
People who make assertions based on verifiable written information are glibly accused of relying on “hearsay,” merely because they are too young and not present when Zik was failing his own people, all that is done in the same breath that we are referred to additional (hearsay?) reading materials of the praise-singers’ choosing. What use then is it to read and write books?
We are encouraged to knight an Igbo deserter who abandoned Nd’Igbo and joined the enemy only one-year into a war to resist genocide. If a man will not fight a war against genocide to the conclusion, he will not surrender his life for anything, including his family. By his defection or by having one foot in Biafra and the other in Nigeria, Zik was said to be acting in our best interest because he claimed he was going to effect a kinder-gentler surrender, a sweet surrender for Biafra. What then was it that Benedict Arnold was guilty of? Benedict Arnold was hero for both sides in the same war. The British battle-line at Saratoga is eternal evidence that from battle to battle, Benedict Arnold served his country with distinction. Indeed, in fighting for the patriots, it is said of Benedict Arnold that no general was more imaginative, daring, or courageous.
Rightly, Benedict Arnold’s place in American history is as a traitor because for £2O,OOO, Benedict Arnold made the fateful decision to surrender West Point and its 3,000 defenders. Another sweet surrender! Like Zik after him, who hoped that his treachery would speed up the Biafran surrender, Arnold hoped that his act would lead to the collapse of the American cause. The similarities don’t end there. Arnold failed. But he received 6,000¢ from the British government and was appointed as a brigadier general in the British Army. Zik was appointed GCFR? Has it occurred to some of you that Ike Nwachukwu was killing Igbo people at the battlefield so that Nd’Igbo may have a “sweet defeat?” too?
Some of us may not have been around when Zik bestrode the political landscape of BiafraNigeria like a colossus. Since we are urged to discount non-experiential data, we have a claim about Zik’s legacy that no other generation is able to make. We have lived the greatest percentage of our lives under the surrender that Zik “negotiated” for us than any other generation on earth, and that includes the generation that fought the Biafran war. Thus, using their own (non-“hearsay”) thinking, we are the foremost authorities on the interpretation of the “Zik-negotiated” surrender, and our arguments are therefore superior to the “hearsay” of those confused by recollections from a fluky era dominated by Zik.
Yet, the clearest indictment of Zik, and the evidence that Zik’s place in Igbo history is unsecured lies not in the disdain of the generation that knew him not, but in the forlorn attempts of Zik’s praise-singers as they expend so much energy to convince enlightened men to ignore overwhelming evidence of Zik's perfidy. Heroism hath no such difficulty to make itself understood.
Zik? At best, Zik is osondi owendi, and I am starting to think that the more you are able to comprehend about the events of Zik’s life, the more o na ewe gi. At worst Zik belongs in the Igbo hall of infamy, and that is where the posthumous praise-singing reminds us to consign him. Zik is an Igbo Benedict Arnold.
Though belated, permit me to welcome you on board. You speak well.
I detest repeating myself, on the other hand the gist here – those that would like to ignore overwhelming evidence of Zik's perfidy - I just could not resist. I have earlier narrated how the news of Zik’s defection demoralised yours truly and many of us in the Biafran Army.
We moved on, nonetheless, it was and still remains a mystery. Because, it aroused perplexes that still cannot be explained. It is piteous as we live to experience the present state of the salvaged Nigeria – in 1969.
I’ll sign-off paraphrasing you, thus:
"We have lived the greatest percentage of our lives under the surrender that Zik "negotiated" for us than any other generation on earth, and that includes the generation that fought the Biafran war. Thus, using their own (non-"hearsay") thinking, we are the foremost authorities on the interpretation of the "Zik-negotiated" surrender, and our arguments are therefore superior to the "hearsay" of those confused by recollections from a fluky era dominated by Zik".
Right on - brotherman.
The truth is evident, the title of a lecture Ikemba had a couple of yours ago. It is pathetic; our people don’t seem to learn. Sad, history is repeating it self, while most people siddon dey look. In my neck of wood, some would just say YNK!
posted
Zik's statement after the January 15, 1966 coup, to the British press in London.
quote:Violence has never been an instrument used by us, as founding fathers of the Nigerian Republic, to solve political problems. In the British tradition, we talked the Colonial Office into accepting our challenges for a tLte-B-tLte the demerits and merits of our case for self-government.
After six constitutional conferences in 1953, 1954, 1957, 1958, 1959, and 1960, Great Britain conceded to us the right to assert our political independence as from October 1, 1960. None of the Nigerian political parties ever adopted violent means to gain our political freedom and we are happy to claim that not a drop of British or Nigerian blood was shed in course of our national struggle for the place in the sun. This historical fact enabled me to state publicly in Nigeria that Her Majesty's Government has presented self-government to us on a platter of gold. Of course, my contemporaries scorned at me, but the facts of history are irrefutable. I consider it most unfortunate that our 'Young Turks' decided to introduce the element of violent revolution into Nigerian politics. No matter how they and our general public might have been provoked by obstinate and perhaps grasping politicians, it is an unwise policy. I have contacted General Aguiyi-Ironsi, General Officer Commanding the Nigerian Armed Forces, who I understand, has now assumed the reins of the Federal Government. I offered my services for any peace overtures to stop further bloodshed, to placate the mutinous officers, and to restore law and order. As soon as I hear from him, I shall make arrangements to return home. As far as I am concerned, I regard the killings of our political and military leaders as a national calamity.
posted
Nkem my brother, thank you for the welcome. I could imagine what it must have felt like to learn that the foremost elder Igbo statesman was joining the enemy while young Igbo men and woman were dying in the battlefields. Patriot, indeed!!!
Posts: 57 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged
posted
Zik is already receiving all the respect he deserves from the only sources that he deserves such respect from, the wild animals that today defecate upon his final resting place and the tall wild weeds that cover his tomb.
Let the traitors honor the their own. What part do we have in a man who was too good to fight with his own people?
posted
I found this thread interesting for reminding us of our history. My point of view about Zik is that he played an important role in the fight for Nigeria's Independence. Nobody can deny it. It was a huge contribution. In a country of more than 100 million people, if 1000 people have contributed as much as Zik, Nigeria would surely be better today. Zik, as a human being, was liable to making mistakes. So we should not ask him to be perfect.
I did not read much of Ziks writings or autobiography, I did not read from those who worked with him either. But by my personal experience, I do not believe any history written by white people on Africa or Africans. This is because they committed a lot of atrocities on black people and today, they are ready to do more today if not checked. As Napoleon rightly pointed out, "History is lies agreed upon by a group of people".
As regards Ndi Igbo, what matters today is what we want to achieve and how. We can always learn from history, but it is essential that we apply that knowledge somewhere, otherwise it would become useless.
As I have mentioned already, we have to communicate better among ourselves at each of the following levels: Igbo, Nigerians, black race for our survival. The advantage of the communication is that the future generation won't be deceived, there will always be enough people to correct any tendencies of falsifying history. The mistake of our elites is that they shared very little with others, they kept all they know, all that happened to themselves. They wanted to be considered as leaders. In fact we have never had people like Zik as leaders, too simply because we did not appoint him and that he was not accountable to us. We have the same problems today in ala Igbo. We have to introduce elective leadership in Ohanaeze to designate our leaders. In this case, nobody will contest their leadership and we can change them if they are not performing, irrespective of waht goes on in Nigeria. We can even opt for non-rewable term of four years for the leaders.
Some of our people seem to buy anything, we have to solve that through effective communication. For the moment, let's support the cancellation of last elections while continuing our campaign for the support of APGA and the reconstruction of Ohanaeze.
___________________ 1) Everything you can imagine is real->Picasso
2) They taught you the praises of their God, and these hosannas, when tuned into your sorrows, gave you the hope of a better world to come-->Patrice Lumumba Posts: 379 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP:
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
